33 Special Types of Invasive Breast Carcinoma: Diagnostic Criteria ...
33 Special Types of Invasive Breast Carcinoma: Diagnostic Criteria ...
33 Special Types of Invasive Breast Carcinoma: Diagnostic Criteria ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
study <strong>of</strong> 2658 cases <strong>of</strong> primary invasive breast carcinoma patients, when histologic<br />
grade, lymph node status, and tumor size were considered, histologic grade was the<br />
most important independent factor in predicting survival. Yet, when histologic type<br />
was also considered in the multivariate analysis, it was found to be independently<br />
significant, although comparatively <strong>of</strong> less importance than histologic grade.<br />
Furthermore, histologic grading is important, because disagreements continue to occur<br />
between pathologists as to the subclassification <strong>of</strong> breast carcinoma. This happens<br />
because criteria remain controversial (especially in diagnosing medullary carcinoma<br />
and making distinctions between infiltrating lobular and duct carcinomas), and clearly<br />
mixed and/or intermediate patterns <strong>of</strong> breast carcinoma occur that can be difficult to<br />
classify. Also, some clinicians appear to more easily accept a histologic grade<br />
designation than a vaguely understood and sometimes controversial subtype<br />
designation. Thus, it is wise to give all invasive breast carcinomas a histologic grade,<br />
including the special types like lobular, mucinous, secretory, adenoid cystic,<br />
tubular/cribriform carcinomas, etc. Often, as noted above, these types receive well<br />
differentiated or mBR grade 1 designation, an expected result given their less<br />
aggressive behavior. An exception is medullary carcinoma, for which controversy<br />
continues regarding diagnostic criteria and prognosis. Medullary carcinoma is almost<br />
always mBR grade 3. In contrast to other studies, Elston et al. (5,6,8) were unable to<br />
show an improved outcome for patients with medullary breast carcinoma, even when<br />
strict morphologic criteria were imposed. I believe medullary carcinoma can be over<br />
diagnosed, and it is a diagnosis difficult to reproduce between competent pathologists<br />
(9). The diagnosis <strong>of</strong> medullary carcinoma has become uncommon in our practice.<br />
Histologic grade (especially when using standardized criteria such as the Bloom-<br />
Richardson criteria [10-16]) helps place any invasive breast carcinoma into its proper<br />
prognostic and therapeutic category, especially when there is controversy or confusion<br />
about the proper subtype designation.<br />
-5-